Arun Prasadh R vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 20542 Ker

WP(C) NO. 20849 OF 2021       1

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
        FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 9TH ASWINA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 20849 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
           ARUN PRASADH R
           AGED 41 YEARS
           SON OF C RAJAMANI, HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER
           (JUNIOR) (PHYSICS) V I M HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL,
           PALLASSANA PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 505.

            BY ADVS.
            V.A.MUHAMMED
            M.SAJJAD


RESPONDENT/S:
     1     THE STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
           GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT ANNEXE 11,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

    2       THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
            (HIGHER SECONDARY WING), HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI
            NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

    3       THE REGIONAL DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF HIGHER SECONDARY
            EDUCATION
            CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM-676 519.

    4       THE MANAGER,
            V I M HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PALLASSANA,
            PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 505.
    5       THE PRINCIPAL,
            V I M HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PALLASSANA,
            PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 505.

            SRI BIJOY CHANDRAN, SR GP


    THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 20849 OF 2021              2

                                    JUDGMENT

The petitioner states that while he was serving as a Guest Lecturer in

Physics in the V I M Higher Secondary School, Pallassana, the petitioner was

appointed as HSST (Jr. Physics) on a regular basis as per Ext.P3 order of

appointment. The petitioner contends that the proposal for approval was

rejected on the sole ground that Ext.P3 was belatedly forwarded. Being

aggrieved, the petitioner is stated to have preferred Ext.P5 appeal before the

2nd respondent. Apprehending delay in disposal of the appeal, the petitioner

is before this Court seeking directions.

2. I have heard Sri.M.Sajjad, the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. In view of the limited nature

of the relief sought for, notice to the party respondents are dispensed with.

3. After having carefully evaluated the contentions raised in this

writ petition, the submissions made across the Bar and the facts and

circumstances, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of at

the admission stage itself by issuing the following directions:

a) There will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to take up,

consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5 as per procedure

and in strict adherence to the provisions of law. An opportunity of

being heard, either physically or virtually, shall be afforded to the

petitioner or his authorised representative and the party

respondents.

b) Orders, as directed above, shall be passed expeditiously, in

any event, within a period of three months from the date of

production of a copy of this judgment.

c) It would be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of the

writ petition along with the judgment before the concerned

respondent for further action.

This writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE sru

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20849/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS0 NO 125/2019/GEDN DATED 20.8.2019 OF THE GOVT

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SELECTION COMMITTEE MINUTES HELD ON 21.11.2019

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER OF THE PETITIONER DATED 16.1.2020

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO H/6631/20/RDD/HSE/MLPM DATED 24/3/2021 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PETITION FILED BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT DATED 30.8.2021

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION REPORTED IN 2017(3) KHC 429 DECIDED ON 19.6.2017

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL